The United Kingdom (United Nations Association) held its conference in (sunny) Morecambe earlier this year and provided a whole document from chatter, codifying their inane hot air. They condemned the atrocities but argued against early intervention in Afghanistan. Instead, the UN should have tried to determine if Osama and Al-Qaeda was guilty. Why? Because all international coalitions would be far better if they were under the objective control of the United Nations rather than have "self-centred agendas" (like defending your country, for example) "from skewing the process".

The policy document adds up to a slew of disarmament, signing up to every international treaty that exists, placing all of our peacekeeping forces under UN control, less co-operation with the US and more co-operation with the EU. On the plus side, they do condemn human rights violations in China.

Do we need to sign up to every treaty written by the United Nations. A permanent seat at the Security Council is useful enough for our needs but should we withdraw our co-operation from the irrelevant areas of this assembly?